Message not distributed on dnso list, so probably worth reading Mark Measday wrote: > Mr. Sondow, Mr. Teernstra and Mr. Gaetano are to be congratulated on their > positivism. > > One would hope that, with the general agreement to adopt Mr. Alvestrand's > rules of order pro tem, Mr. Gaetano could either perform his mandate > (i) by clarifying whether he is in fact cleared by his organization or > ex-organization to perform as Chair (maybe this has been done, no > disrespect, Roberto) and > (ii) by enlisting discreetly the considerable intellectual resources of the > list members to produce specific proposals. > profitably. > > But surely the time has come to act, not brainstorm. You have been > brainstorming for nearly two years. ICANN will be a billion dollar business > by the time domain registrants wake up to the changes in the law and you > will have done nothing to defend them. > > Could Mr. Gaetano please provide: > > (i) a list of issues to be addressed > (ii) a procedural time frame > (iii) a summary list of ex-officio duties to be performed by list members > willing to assist in (i) and (ii) > (iv) a list of WG's tasked to produce a report on each topic. For example > Mr. Williams could be requested to use some of his spare staff to produce a > report on the possibilities of marketing DNSO membership profitably to > interested parties in the public sector, i.e. charging government > departments for access*. > (v) details of secure communications procedures to ensure that all > communications are kept to an appropriate group. > > Best, > > MM (gone skiing) > > * Hey, Jeff, remember the great Robert Maxwell's Pergamon? All part of the > service. > > Roberto Gaetano wrote: > > > Brad, > > > > I completely agree with your approach of having smaller task-oriented > > lists. > > I tried already to express the fact that I am uncomfortable with one > > single all-inclusive list, good for discussion on any topic as well as > > for voting. > > > > As far as hosting the lists somewhere else, I have personally no problem > > in following this model, pretty much IETF-like, should the DNSO > > resources be insufficient to manage the load. > > This, of course, would have the advantage of the "distribution", but the > > drawback of the lack of uniqueness of the source of information, namely > > the archives at DNSO.org. > > I also have the impression that there is much sensitivity about the > > "official record" problem. > > Would a list hosted (and archived) somewhere else be acceptable to you? > > Considering the (past, I hope) problems with forging, would people trust > > a complete list management somewhere else, and with which criteria? > > > > Open for brainstorming. > > > > Regards > > Roberto > > > > >The reason the WGs have their own lists can be summed up by the > > >realization that a small room can hold only so many people. It has a > > >capacity. Just like an ethernet, It will only support a certain amount > > of > > >bandwidth and then come to a halt due to collisions. A token ring will > > >slowly degrade because of it's orderly process. > > > > > >A mail list can only support so much bandwidth in the form of > > cacophany. I > > >use the term cacophany not to merely include disruptive behaviour, but > > the > > >realization that a forum can contain only so much traffic before the > > >insignificant parts for any one person become too much to wade through > > in > > >order to get to their "particular substance". > > > > > >That is why we typically delegate tasks out to various lists, like - > > >discuss, and tech, and legal, and devel. Atty's would have to wade > > through > > >miles of change logs and code if a devel list were merged with a legal > > >list. > > > > > >The problem here, is one of structure, and appropriate divestiture of > > the > > >topics. It's really comical actually. Here we stand. All in one room, > > >talking at the same time about different things. > > > > > >Might I respectfully suggest of our Chair that he consider breaking us > > out > > >into committees by task or topic. Mr. Gaetano is the one person who can > > > > >bring that order. Our lists don't have to be hosted by DSNO.org Several > > of > > >us here would be more than happy to provide the facilities merely by > > being > > >asked. > > > > > >Committees bring focus to a central point. Remember in the eighties > > when > > >we started thinking in terms of distributed computing? many of us in > > that > > >ivory tower called the "Machine Room" wanted no part of it. PCs forced > > a > > >distrubuted environment, but the big fear was disruption and mass > > >confusion. > > > > > >Most people didn't figure that the PC would just reinforce the notion > > of > > >centralization of databases and files. > > > > > >In other words, How could someone possibly (no sarcasm please) disrupt > > 20 > > >mailing lists, with the point people of those lists coordination on a > > >central committee (probably it's own list apart from this one) where > > the > > >work hashed out would come to fruition. > > > > > >Not only is ICANN banking on the assumption that we won't or can't do > > >that, but that is also the very model they have adopted to accomplish > > >their tasks - and it has only strengthened them. > > > > > >Or, we could just keep shouting out our ideas right here in any order > > that > > >suits us. > > > > > > > > >On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Michael Sondow wrote: > > > > > >> Joop Teernstra wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Those interested in the full truth of what happened in the first > > Steering > > >> > Committee of the IDNO, the trigger event, provided by Joe Baptista, > > the > > >> > attempted capture of the SC by William Walsh and "Bradley > > Thornton" before > > >> > an agreed structure was in place and their vendetta of slander when > > the > > >> > majority refused to roll over, can find it all in the idno > > archives. > > >> > http://list.idno.org/archives > > >> > > > >> > Just as ICANN can learn lessons for its General Membership > > structure from > > >> > what is happening here, history of what happened in the IDNO is > > already > > >> > repeating itself. > > >> > > >> The lesson to be learned here, I think, Joop, is that mailing lists > > >> are not, after all, a useful way of accomplishing good things. There > > >> will always be vengeful, unhappy people like Walsh and agents > > >> provocateurs like Crispin and Crocker to disrupt them. > > >> > > >> Three or four people of like mind who trust each other can > > >> accomplish more, by telephone, than this rag-tag of little Caesars > > >> and neurotic sociopaths. That is what the ICANN Board realizes, and > > >> why they have so far beaten us. > > >> > > >> > > >> ============================================================ > > >> Michael Sondow I.C.I.I.U. http://www.iciiu.org > > >> Tel. (718)846-7482 Fax: (603)754-8927 > > >> ============================================================ > > >> > > > > > >--Bradley D. Thornton MCSE; MCT.-- , bootstrap of > > >the Cyberspace Association, > > >the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners > > >http://www.idno.org (or direct:) > > >http://www.tallship.net/idno > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > _____________________________________________________________________ > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the ordinary user of > the e-mail address to which it was addressed and may also be > privileged. If you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may not > copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any > form whatsoever. If you have received this e-mail in error please > e-mail the sender by replying to this message. > ______________________________________________________________________ -- _____________________________________________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the ordinary user of the e-mail address to which it was addressed and may also be privileged. If you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may not copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any form whatsoever. If you have received this e-mail in error please e-mail the sender by replying to this message. ______________________________________________________________________
